wayne seltzer wrote:
Thanks Akul and Edwar
I think you guys are the only ones who saw my picture.
I guess either you have to post more than one shot here or maybe people have hit the hide button on me.
Wayne, I really like the composition and the colors of your image, but I would prefer a softer light and a slightly lower contrast between the lighter and the darker parts of the image.
Akul, Edward: thank you! The winter comeback here drove me to the mood to play with colors, and Bern fell as my victim
Jochen, love that landscape from the North. The scene is simple yet very attractive to me.
Phil, great portraits! Those guys are all characters.
I couldn't stop to play with PP, so here goes the gloomy woods with 2/100 ZF.2:
abhijeeth wrote:
Some more from Yosemite: 5d2 + 21 @ 2.8 [1st one], 50Mp @ 2.0 [2nd one] and the third link is to the 100/2 CY [@ 5.6 I think]I kind of liked the 1st one, but something bothered me, and found it; the photo looks it's tilted to left, 0.5-1 degrees to right straightened it - weird thing, I have not been so I don't know how it's in real life...
The 2nd photo; 50MP can look sometimes almost like 100MP, however 50MP can only do this kind of photos if you crop corners out, the smearing on bottom left corner look weird.
Bob, 5DmkIII makes 50MP shine, photos were very 100MP look-a-like, and I don't see that rarely.
Wayne, liked your "red rock" image, but it's very small since the horizontal shadow frames the image to square image.
Akul, liked the last image of the 4 urban images (the bicyclist road markins)
Kururu, greats shots with 2/25 keep them coming!!! Also I would appreciate if you could post top left corner of this photo as 100% crop (see this post).
Phil, very nice black and white portraits, liked all of them but 3rd one is my favourite. Great tonality in all of them, very natural looking B&W processing. Also great light in 4th photo.
Edward, your film photos are very grainy, when I shoot film they were not even close that grainy, but on other hand I didn't shoot anything over ISO 400 (and only one roll of the 400 since it was useless). However the night cityscape image was quite nice, thou almost all details (e.g. brick in roofs) are lost to grain/noise.
wayne seltzer wrote:
I guess either you have to post more than one shot here or maybe people have hit the hide button on me. Hardest thing with this forum is that when you are few days away there are few pages of great photos. I don't feel good just saying everyone "great photos!", instead try to give constructive feedback, that is from what I have learned the most. When there are too many photos this just becomes impossible.
"Gröbming Church, Austria" - Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100 @ f/5, 1/1000s (HDR), ISO 100 - 1080P version
Lieutenant - I missed the can on train track shot. I like that a lot. Jean jacket gentleman with baguette in his hand just captures 'France' for me.
Phil - Very nice B/W portraits. #3 and #5 stand out for me.
Wayne - It is definitely not you. It is the rate this thread get filled up as we all know is very fast. Finding a piece of gold from mount of gold gets hard. I imagine not all people go through all images, or are inclined to leave comments. ( So where the heck was it ?? )
Edward - Film was Fuji Pro 160S, a soft contrast film. I think I brought out too much grain in PP trying to make it look like a normal contrast film.
Interesting. I think for the size of the photo, grain felt a bit large on that shot. On the other hand, for the B/W shots, I like them. I like the #2.
nickson - I like that crop with your PP. Cinematic enhancement.
Samuli - That shot really deserves to be shown bigger. Thank you for the link for the large image. I get the 'being there' much more instantly from the larger image. Amount of detail you always retain in your shots simply amazes me. Much more to learn.
Thank you, abhijeeth, Edward, and Akul! It's hard to comment on every picture as the thread is moving so quickly and I appreciate you guys for consistently doing it. I feel bad if I comment on some and not others...so I end up observing on the side.
Wayne, I do agree with Bobu. I like the composition but it could use some pop with more contrast or dodge and burn.
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Edward, your film photos are very grainy, when I shoot film they were not even close that grainy, but on other hand I didn't shoot anything over ISO 400 (and only one roll of the 400 since it was useless). However the night cityscape image was quite nice, thou almost all details (e.g. brick in roofs) are lost to grain/noise.
Thank you very much for your comments, Samuli. I am aware of this problem, but unfortunately my technique seems to be the cause as bicubic resizing algorithms like to preserve the grain from the high resolution file. I should probably put it through noise ninja before resizing. There are many ways to do it but not sure which is the best one.
Here is a good article about the subject. Luckily it only shows at web sized reductions. My prints look perfect.
akul wrote:
Edward -
Interesting. I think for the size of the photo, grain felt a bit large on that shot. On the other hand, for the B/W shots, I like them. I like the #2.
Thanks Luka. For the grain being too large for the size, you can check the interesting article I linked to in my reply to Samuli. Film is probably meant to be printed not viewed on screen
edwardkaraa wrote:
Thank you very much for your comments, Samuli. I am aware of this problem, but unfortunately my technique seems to be the cause as bicubic resizing algorithms like to preserve the grain from the high resolution file. I should probably put it through noise ninja before resizing. There are many ways to do it but not sure which is the best one.
Here is a good article about the subject. Luckily it only shows at web sized reductions. My prints look perfect.
Edward, I don't know how you scan your films, but back in the film days I had Minolta film scanner and I don't remember seeing this kind of "noise"/grain issue in the images. Files I was able found were all dated to same day in 2002, I would assume I scanned them during 2001 and 2002 - while searching these files I found out that I had ONLY some JPGs left from the old times - sure I have kept the negatives and slides, but if I remember correctly Minolta was not compatible with anything else than Win95 & WinNT...so it seems they are lost for good
However I did make some webthumbnails (975px on longest side), and the grain doesn't seem to much of an issue. Sure it can be seen in some images. I tried various sharpening methods and any step sharpening method (or other method trying to preserve textures) don't work. However the old fashion "resize to final size and then USM 100-300% and 0.2-0.4px" did still work rather well.
Since not Z* images I just post directory link: http://www.vahonen.com/2012/OldFilmScans/
(little Zeiss relevant: seems that Pentax 50/1.7 seems to create same kind of twirly bokeh as 50P, so maybe planar design as well)
edwardkaraa wrote:
Thanks for the reply. Very nice shots in your link!
I used to have a Nikon L5000 and currently a Reflecta Proscan 7200. Both use LED lights. These lights produce the sharpest results, similar to a condenser head on a conventional enlarger. My scans were even more grainy with the Nikon. The Minolta used a diffused fluorescent light, reducing the grain substantially. You can download an updated version of Vuescan, which contains drivers for your scanner, so it's still usable
Thanks Edward, I'm more embarrassed these old photos than to proud of them... I didn't know that more recent scanners emphasize the grain, with Minolta I was always getting fairly small grain, but noise with negatives was sometimes really annoying (or underexposed Velvia, which was very hard even properly exposed for the Minolta).
Minolta scanner still usable, excellent --- searching...found manual...DImage Scan Elite II hmmm, it should have also Firewire connection, that is good news since it was REALLY slow with USB. Now if I remember where the scanner itself is stored...
edwardkaraa wrote:
Edit: I added 2 shots with ZM 35/2 on Provia 100F. What do you think about the grain?
Grain is quite OK in these, just in the sky it looks like bad JPG packing or something (but is caused by grain not JPG), if I remember correctly I liked Provia best because it was easiest to scan and ICC-profile for it required least "stretching" of the image color channerls - But where is Zeiss look? I had understood that ZM35 is quite "zeissy" in the way how it draws, and the rough wall would give 1000+1 opportunities to show the drawing style
----------------------------------
edgately, nice shot of the volcanic crater - are some of the edges glowing red still?
----------------------------------
Aargh, run out of readymade images, have to make one more... "Turnau, Austria - Backlight forest" - Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 @ f/4 (this photo has no reason to use f/4, would have been slightly sharper with f/5.6), 1/1600s, ISO 100 - larger [/url]
Its hard to see any glow in daylight. If you look carefully on the lower center of the crater there is an elevated lava lake. There is lava splashing around in there but it is hard to see with all of the steam/gas being emitted. Its not a zeiss image but you can check this out to see more detail ( http://500px.com/photo/5927187 ) Other lava images are on my 500px site http://500px.com/edgately
@picturethis LOVE LOVE the flower shot with the 2/100 You have me wanting to head out now and shoot with mine. Thanks for an inspiring and well executed image
